21 ms·

iMac Pro's T2 chip

538 points by lumisota 9y ago

irieblue 9y ago
Apple has basically replaced the SMC architecture with a new architecture that is the equivalent of an Apple watch. From an integration perspective, it makes sense. Apple no longer has to source an SMC/arm chip from another supplier, they use their own. All Mac users have at some point had to reset the SMC on a Mac. The MacWorld comment that the iMac pro because of the T2 chip is unlike another Mac, is only half the story. The Functionality that was handled by the SMC (which was an arm based architecture), is now handled by a more beefier arm chip T2. It's a cost savings for Apple, and allows for more advanced functionality. In the Interim , the T2 is doing exactly what the SMC used to do.
monocasa 9y ago
> This version requires a network connection when you attempt to install any OS software updates, because it needs to verify with Apple that the updates are legitimate. They can't just verify the signatures?
- ReverseCold 9y ago
  Then you would be able to downgrade your OS version, they don't want that. Edit: Apparently not, you can turn it off so it doesn't require network. See the other comment.
  - mikewhy 9y ago
    Except for the fact that it still lets you do exactly that.
  - saagarjha 9y ago
    > Then you would be able to downgrade your OS version, they don't want that. Ignoring for the moment that you can already do this, allowing users to go back to older versions is a security hole.
- pwinnski 9y ago
  By default, they start out at the highest level of security, assuming an always-on network connection. It can be adjusted downward, which those of us reading HN are likely to prefer. Signature verification alone may confirm that a release is from Apple, but it doesn't confirm that the release hasn't been superseded due to security issues. (Or marketing, if you're conspiracy-minded.) The "Medium" setting allows older versions of MacOS, so although the article doesn't say, I suspect that is doing signature-verification alone, and does not require a network connection.
  - lumisota 9y ago
    More about Secure Boot: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT208330 https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT208330
  - monocasa 9y ago
    > Signature verification alone may confirm that a release is from Apple, but it doesn't confirm that the release hasn't been superseded due to security issues. (Or marketing, if you're conspiracy-minded.) But fuse sets will. Thus is how downgrade attacks are generally protected against in high integrity consumer electronics. That way your device continues to work when you reboot and Comcast is down again.
    - eridius 9y ago
      I'm sure the T2 doesn't verify the OS against the network at boot time, but rather when you're installing the OS update. Once it's been installed, it's trusted. The trivial proof here is if it did anything else, ignoring an OS update would brick your device, which is obviously not desired behavior.
      - willstrafach 9y ago
        > I'm sure the T2 doesn't verify the OS against the network at boot time, but rather when you're installing the OS update. Once it's been installed, it's trusted. This is correct. Network is only needed for re-install on the high security setting. When already installed, the only verification is to ensure signatures are valid, similar to how iOS devices function (You cannot re-flash/downgrade to an older OS, but if you have an older OS installed, the device will not prevent you from booting).
- asendra 9y ago
  It might be about blacklisting older versions, so users can only install the newest version like on iOS.
nimbius 9y ago
if youd like to cut past the fanboy fluff... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_mobile_application_processors#Apple_T2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_mobile_application_proce... The Apple T2 chip is a SoC from Apple mainly serving as a secure enclave for encrypted keys in the iMac Pro 2017. It gives users the ability to lock down the computer's boot process. It also handles system functions like the camera and audio control, and manages the solid-state drive.
- djsumdog 9y ago
  So it's basically SecureBoot + lets remove the SATA controller, the audio chip, the H264 chip and roll them into one chip. It feels like horizontal integration; similar to what Elon Musk does with SpaceX by integrating the pipeline and producing everything internally to save costs. The article doesn't sound very revolutionary. They're saving money, maybe a little space, by producing all those subsystems themselves. So long as they don't lock down the hardware so you can run Linux or other operating systems on it, I guess that's okay. Still, it sounds very non-upgradable. The article mentions the memory comes in two banks. Is it replaceable, or is it soldered to the board? nvme ssd cards are super tiny, super fast and super standardized. I can upgrade the ones in most laptops. I can replace a dying battery. Apple seems more geared to people who don't like to fix things or work on their own machines.
  - atonse 9y ago
    It's PCIE/NVMe and removable [1]. But I don't know if it's a standard M2 slot. I doubt it. I didn't mind these proprietary connectors until I dropped tea on my laptop. I took it to the apple store to get them to retrieve my data, but they said even THEY don't have the means to read data from their proprietary SSD connector, and instead told me to go to a data recovery company. I understand they use proprietary connectors, if they empower their support techs to have means to also recover from catastrophe, it would help the customer a lot more. [1] https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iMac+Pro+Teardown/101807#s191192 https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iMac+Pro+Teardown/101807#s19...
    - 9y ago
_ph_ 9y ago
Good to read something positive about CPU technology today :). Beyond the obvious improvements for securing the computer, it is very interesting to see how the T2 chip not only operates the camera but most of all also works as a hard disk controller. So the "CPU" of the computer might be Intel still, but it is a bit of a guest in a system that is in fact controlled by the T2 chip. As the T2 seems to basically the iPhone CPU it also shows how great a hardware is in current phones now, if using that chip creates a faster flash memory controller for the biggest Intel CPUs.
microcolonel 9y ago
> On most Macs, there are discrete controllers for audio, system management and disk drives. But the T2 handles all these taks. The T2 is responsible for controlling the iMac Pro’s stereo speakers, internal microphones, and dual cooling fans, all by itself. Translation: T2 is a southbridge, but this time with a camera controller, and a TPM in addition to the normal disk, audio codec, peripheral bus, and GPIO functionality.
- strictnein 9y ago
  Yeah, I was definitely expecting some more interesting than this. It reads like an NVIDIA nForce2 press release from 15 years ago.
  - microcolonel 9y ago
    "Your iMac, now with SoundStorm™!" Though for what it's worth, nForce2 still did require a separate codec, even if it had the controller built in.
- jandrese 9y ago
  It does a bit more than a southbridge, but it does take over all of the functionality that was traditionally in the southbridge. It's more like a cellphone architecture where the CPU is a slave to the black box that actually boots the device. This is exactly the sort of vendor lockdown/lockout on a PC that people have been warning us about since TPMs and signed bootloaders started appearing on cell phones.
- stuff4ben 9y ago
  Or T2 is like the Fat Agnus, Denise, and Paula chips all rolled into one, similar to the Amiga. Everything new is just recycled from the past.
  - bch 9y ago
    Came to say the same thing (or see if someone else said it). This looks like classic multiprocessing, and looks like computing, like music and clothing, is also subject to ~20-year fashion cycles for some things.
gigatexal 9y ago
I know I trust Apple[1] and all that but I (tin-foil hats on) don't like the system on a system stuff going on. I don't like closed systems that I have no oversight into, into what they might be logging, etc. The industry will likely follow Apple here and it's not too much of an issue given how low volume that iMac Pro is going to be but this could trickle down into macbooks and that'd be sketchy. I should just go hide in my bunker and build linux from scratch on a fully GNU open laptop -- alas that's not practical. [1] more so than Google because Google uses my data and habits to sell me ads and sell that data to their customers, Apple wants to sell me gadgets and songs and movies, if that changes I'll drop Apple
- danielrhodes 9y ago
  Yes after a full source code review. :-P Like it or not, you have to place trust somewhere. Maybe it’s not Apple, but pretending one has full visibility over every system is just going to create cognitive dissonance.
  - lisper 9y ago
    At least with Linux I can do a code review. Or hire someone I trust to do it for me. With a closed system that is not an option.
    - willstrafach 9y ago
      You can reverse engineer the firmware files though. I do this very often when new versions of iOS are released.
    - jdc0589 9y ago
      I mean yea, but this is about a processor and related microcode. It sucks, but there literally is no real mainstream opensource audit-able option for the consumer market right now.
      - lisper 9y ago
        There's this: https://www.sifive.com/products/risc-v-core-ip/ https://www.sifive.com/products/risc-v-core-ip/ Not quite ready for prime-time, but it's a big step in the right direction. At least there's hope for future.
swozey 9y ago
> For security reasons, the T2 is the iMac Pro hardware’s “root of trust,” and it validates the entire boot process when the power comes on. The T2 starts up, checks things out, loads its bootloader, verifies that it’s legitimate and cryptographically signed by Apple, and then moves on to the next part of the boot process. If they start putting this in every machine going forward I wonder if this will be the end of the hackintosh
- thinkythought 9y ago
  Well, beginning of the end. It would be 3 years from whatever date they release a new version that locks it to a chip like this and drop support for old models without it. So lets say, 4-5 years. Actually, probably longer since they've been supporting old systems for as long as 8 years(2007 imac, others) with some macbook pros approaching 9-10 even. How long you think it would take for them to do this depends on whether you really think they'd just decide to cut off a ton of machines at once and reverse course on really long support windows. And long windows really seems to be a roadmap, if you look at how the ipad 2 was supported as well. I think they care more about "look at how we support our products!" than hackintoshes. What i could easily imagine though is way more features than just imessage and such being gate-kept into "only systems with our secure chip are allowed to run this"
  - whywhywhywhy 9y ago
    I understand the security benefits but I can't help but just look at this as yet another piece of disposability on an already very "disposable" piece of 5K+ (starting) hardware. How many iPhones are now in landfills because you couldn't downgrade the OS to an old version that would be usable.
    - 1123581321 9y ago
      I agree with your main point about disposability. There shouldn’t be many iPhones in landfills, though. Apple recycles 100% of the materials, so as long as the old phone can be traded in or dropped off in an electronics bin, it won’t be wasted even though the owner will have been out the money by rebuying prematurely.
zapt02 9y ago
This just sound like the Intel Management Engine story waiting to happen again. A controller that handles camera, networking and is the "root of trust"? No thank you.
- dkonofalski 9y ago
  In what way is this similar to the IME story? Apple's history with the Secure Enclave on iOS devices leads me to believe that this will be much more secure and that a white paper will be forthcoming unlike Intel's complete opacity surrounding IME.
  - zapt02 9y ago
    Do you truly believe Apples sophisticated security enclave with computer-like capabilities (and probably running a full OS) will have a manual and white-paper? This is the exact opposite of what Apple will do, they will lock it down and put it behind patents as they do best.
    - gsteinb88 9y ago
      https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf https://images.apple.com/business/docs/FaceID_Security_Guide.pdf https://images.apple.com/business/docs/FaceID_Security_Guide... Seems pretty likely there will be a whitepaper and some conference talks about this as well.
      - zapt02 9y ago
        You're linking a minimal manual which is required for corporate deployment, hardly anything Apple is being forthcoming about. I'm pretty sure you and I have different definitions of acceptable disclosure - unless Apple makes the entire chip possible to audit, I don't consider it to be acceptable.
        dpkonofa 9y ago
qubex 9y ago
This is slightly off-topic, but developments such as these really make me look forward to when Apple will finally get around to releasing their new Mac Pro (coyly quasi-announced as not being due for release in 2017, but in development supposedly for a late 2018 or early 2019). This kind of technology might not be revolutionary per se, but makes for a very solid technological basis to build a system on. If the Mac Pro turns out to be an iMac Pro divorced from the screen and with some internal expandability in a suitably fancy-looking case, I'll be very content.
- vbezhenar 9y ago
  I hope that Mac Pro would be good old case with standard components without extra price. I really like macOS but all Apple's computers are just terrible for me. Mac Pro is my last hope to stay in Apple ecosystem.
  - qubex 9y ago
    Considering how long it is taking them to develop it, and considering the direction they have taken with their Emoji-keyboard MacBookPros with custom chips and now the architecture of the iMac Pro, the Mac Pro is going to be anything but standard.
    - gurkendoktor 9y ago
      But they have already developed a non-standard Mac Pro in 2013, and it is widely considered a failure. I'm not sure if they'll really make the same mistake twice?
      - scarface74 9y ago
        Its not just widely considered a failure, they publicly admitted it was a failure. https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/transcript-phil-schiller-craig-federighi-and-john-ternus-on-the-state-of-apples-pro-macs/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/transcript-phil-schiller-c... Craig Federighi: I think it’s fair to say, part of why we’re talking today, is that the Mac Pro — the current vintage that we introduced — we wanted to do something bold and different. In retrospect, it didn’t well suit some of the people we were trying to reach. It’s good for some; it’s an amazingly quiet machine, it’s a beautiful machine. But it does not address the full range of customers we wanna reach with Mac Pro. But I think we designed ourselves into a bit of a thermal corner, if you will. We designed a system that we thought with the kind of GPUs that at the time we thought we needed, and that we thought we could well serve with a two GPU architecture… that that was the thermal limit we needed, or the thermal capacity we needed. But workloads didn’t materialize to fit that as broadly as we hoped.
mschuster91 9y ago
> Every bit of data stored on an iMac Pro’s SSD is encrypted on the fly by the T2, so that if a nefarious person tried to pull out the storage chips and read them later, they’d be out of luck. What. The. Fuck. How am I supposed to recover my data e.g. if the mainboard gets fried or the machine has to go to service?! With a SATA or NVMe SSD I can plug them into another computer and either keep going (for Linux and macOS, only Windows is a different beast...) or dump the data to somehere safe. With this, Apple forces me to rely on TimeMachine working - which is not a bad idea in itself, but not cool that this is not widely announced on the product page: "BACK UP THE DATA YOURSELF OR IT WILL GET LOST IF ANYTHING GETS SCREWED UP". There's already FileVault for encryption (or LUKS, VeraCrypt and Bitlocker), and in addition some SSDs (and iirc also some expensive HDDs) implement native on disk encryption via standardized SATA commands so one has encrypted storage but still portability (and for native disk encryption, no loss due to CPU-level encryption!). Another reason to not buy anything modern from Apple. If one single problem happens to your modern work machine you're straight out f...ed.
- Waterluvian 9y ago
  I agree that one cannot say, "backing up is good practice, if you don't do it, it's your own fault." Because the real world simply doesn't always work that way. But I like having the option of that feature. For years now my local disks are effectively just local caches. They never have more than a days worth of non-backed-up data. Apple needs to work on making it as automatic and invisible as possible for this to happen to everyone's machine even if they're tech illiterate. All I've seen so far are disparate backup stories that leave me unconfident about any of them.
  - ghaff 9y ago
    >Apple needs to work on making it as automatic and invisible as possible for this to happen to everyone's machine even if they're tech illiterate. I suppose there's some degree of tech literacy required just to know that you should have a backup. But, honestly, Time Machine is probably the easiest backup system I'm aware of and I run all three major operating systems including running a cloud backup on my desktop Mac. If I were to point a finger at anyone, it would be Microsoft. (I don't really expect Linux to be drop-dead simple.) On Windows 10, it's still not really "just works" out of the box.
woliveirajr 9y ago
When all eyes are now looking to the future of branch prediction, this launch will be a bit obfuscated. Does the Intel Xeon inside the iMac Pro also vulnerable? If so, the impact of the T2 will not get attention as it should.
- ovao 9y ago
  Apple addresses the (known) vulnerabilities in the 10.13.2 and 10.13.3 updates.
- rodorgas 9y ago
  High Sierra fixed the KPTI issue without perfomance loss: https://twitter.com/aionescu/status/948609809540046849 https://twitter.com/aionescu/status/948609809540046849
  - rsynnott 9y ago
    "Without performance loss" sounds optimistic, but most things that people would be doing with a Mac likely aren't syscall-intensive enough to show major effects, especially on modernish chips with PCID. Most of the more impressive performance drops from the Linux patch are with things like heavy database workloads.
saagarjha 9y ago
> if you get the 1TB model, your iMac Pro has two 512MB NAND banks Looks like you meant “GB” here.
nutbutter 9y ago
It's impossible to read the article because of the ads.
- esotericsean 9y ago
  uBlock Origin
- lolsal 9y ago
  It is easily readable with Reader View in Safari.
perfmode 9y ago
Is this basically an integrated south bridge?
- ZenoArrow 9y ago
  Sounds like it to me. For those that are unfamiliar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southbridge_(computing) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southbridge_(computing)
- fyfy18 9y ago
  It'll be interesting to see how well Linux ends up supporting these machines. Linux usually works pretty well on older Apple hardware, assuming you wait for a few patches to make everything 100% functional. This will probably mean a whole lot more code will be needed to get to that stage though.
- Rebelgecko 9y ago
  Maybe some bits of Southbridge and TPM mixed together
itomato 9y ago
I am surprised it has taken this long. In the Marklar days, this was something we speculated about as a Clone-defeat mechanism. Essentially a hackintosh blocker. I look forward to following the discoveries made in this subsystem.
bsharitt 9y ago
I find it interesting that Apple is back to high levels of customization in its PCs. If I'm remembering correctly, one of the big motivators to move to x86 was to be able to use more commodity stuff through out the system, rather than the all the custom work required to design PowerPC system. I recall initial speculation that Apple's x86 machines would be pretty much fully custom chipsets and designs that just happened to have an x86 CPU, but then when the release systems came out, they used Intel chipsets and were pretty ordinary from a PC hardware standpoint.
- fnbr 9y ago
  Based on my understanding of the issue, the main difference between now and then is scale. Pre-iPhone, Apple didn't have the scale to make their own chips economically; now, with the massive success of the iPhone, they're able to do this. Their major value proposition is that they're able to build software-differentiated hardware, so building their own chips is extremely valuable to them.
- zitterbewegung 9y ago
  That Stopped during the rise of the iPhone and iPad when they made the A4 chip. Once they figured out how to vertically integrate that during Jobs. After the death of Jobs and the appointment of Tim Cook we just see that vision taken to the end of which we have now.
- com2kid 9y ago
  Custom motherboards is an expertise Apple has built up over the years with the iPhone (of course they also do custom CPUs as well there!). A huge portion of bugs and power issues on a modern PC stem from poor hardware drivers. Cutting out the middle man and just writing all the drivers themselves may very well be a net win for Apple if they want to keep a reputation for working hardware. Then again they have gotten have their lighting out for display working quite right.
  - itomato 9y ago
    Apple have been making logic boards since the beginning. The inclusion of custom silicon isn't new either. Nor are in-house drivers for commodity equipmemt, as the move from NeXT Computer, Inc. to NeXT Software required it. As you point out, by ceasing to rely on third party IP in that custom silicon they reduce the complexity further still. 100% in-house widgets have been on the whiteboard at Apple for a long time.
b1gtuna 9y ago
I love the level of integration with this chip. How big is their IC design team?
- newscracker 9y ago
  Not very big, is my understanding. The team mainly came from the PA Semi acquisition several years ago, and there was some recent news about Google hiring (“poaching”) a key senior person from this team.
znpy 9y ago
Intel ME? Hold my beer. -- Apple.
danellis 9y ago
> Before the iMac Pro was released, there was a lot of speculation that it was part of a trend toward creating a “hybrid Mac” that is driven by both an Intel processor and an Apple-designed ARM chip like those found in other Apple devices. The iMac Pro is definitely a hybrid of a sort, but probably not the one people were expecting. Not the thing people were expecting, but still, does anyone know if the T2 is based around one of Apple's ARM cores?
- wmf 9y ago
  The T2 is rumored to be a derivative of the A10.
kilon 9y ago
"The iMac Pro isn’t running iOS apps" I always find this kind of remarks funny because iOS is essentially a specialised strip down version of MacOS. So basically any accusation of MacOS copying iOS , however exaggerated, is an accusation that MacOS is copying itself.
Chaebixi 9y ago
What is old is new again: https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Five_Different_Macs.txt https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Five_Different_M...
jhiska 9y ago
So... I read the article and I still don't know what, exactly, is the T2 chip or what, exactly, makes it different from other ARM / Intel hybrids, other than several different ways of expressing "it's incredibly, totally great" and "Intel is untrustworthy, so let's trust Apple instead" and "this changes everything all over again". (It doesn't, unless you arbitrarily consider small, incremental changes exclusive to Apple products as the opposite of small and incremental just because of the size of Apple.)
- jacobolus 9y ago
  It’s a chip which replaces the controllers (previously several of them, from different vendors, that Apple didn’t have control over) for disk and network I/O, speakers, microphone, camera, cooling system, etc. with a single Apple-designed chip. This lets Apple add features to their hardware unsupported by other controllers, move some features from the CPU to this new chip which can reduce attack surface area and free up CPU cycles for something else, save space on the motherboard, and maybe save money.
j3097736 9y ago
>The T2 is responsible for controlling the iMac Pro’s stereo speakers, internal microphones, and dual cooling fans, all by itself. So it's just a fancy Super I/O chip
amckinlay 9y ago
I'm glad they allow you to completely disable the "secure boot" functionality so that other OSes like Linux can be installed. Glad Apple didn't pull a Microsoft here. I would be delighted, however, if the secure boot functionality was programmable with custom certificates!
bcjordan 9y ago
Slightly OT, Apple really needs to release a Macbook Pro or two with beefy video cards -- it's becoming nearly untenable to develop games or for AR/VR with their latest hardware. Their Intel-integrated cards are not up to the task.
- AlphaSite 9y ago
  Isn’t this why they added support for externals GPUs?
sspiff 9y ago
> For security reasons, the T2 is the iMac Pro hardware’s “root of trust,” and it validates the entire boot process when the power comes on. The T2 starts up, checks things out, loads its bootloader, verifies that it’s legitimate and cryptographically signed by Apple, and then moves on to the next part of the boot process. How is this more secure from a locked down system using "standard" UEFI secure boot powered by any other TPM implementation? I understand that this is not an in-depth technical analysis, mainly catering to the Mac-loving audience of the site and getting them to feel better about their platform of choice. But I'd be interested to hear why I would trust this Apple T2 chip more than a workstation motherboard with a TPM on it, and secure boot on and loaded only with the keys of myself (in case I were to build my own kernel/bootloader and sign it) or a vendor I trust. I could be missing something, but the process outlined in the article sounds exactly like secure boot.
faragon 9y ago
Where is the disk key? Is it stored in the main board, or in the flash disk itself? E.g. if you have to replace the motherboard, do you lose the data, or because of being in the flash disk it is OK? BTW, if being in the flash disk, how secure it is the key handling?
ksec 9y ago
I am wondering on the cost benefits this has with Apple. While it is insignificant with the iMac Pro, it will be important once it is filter down to entry level. Apple now basically have its own IP in everything. Instead of sourcing and paying IP or chips, they can now mix and match their own and build with TSMC. All with the help of iPhone's R&D. I am pretty sure the next one on the list is WiFi and Bluetooth. This a potential saving of up to $50 in BOM cost. If you tell most PC vendor a extra $50 profits per machine they would have their eyes wide open. This roughly translate to a $100 cheaper Retail pricing, but given it is Apple they will likely use this saving to put YET another silly features on the Macbook to sell it at the same price.

538 points by lumisota 9y ago

Apple has basically replaced the SMC architecture with a new architecture that is the equivalent of an Apple watch. From an integration perspective, it makes sense. Apple no longer has to source an SMC/arm chip from another supplier, they use their own. All Mac users have at some point had to reset the SMC on a Mac. The MacWorld comment that the iMac pro because of the T2 chip is unlike another Mac, is only half the story. The Functionality that was handled by the SMC (which was an arm based architecture), is now handled by a more beefier arm chip T2. It's a cost savings for Apple, and allows for more advanced functionality. In the Interim , the T2 is doing exactly what the SMC used to do.

monocasa 9y ago

> This version requires a network connection when you attempt to install any OS software updates, because it needs to verify with Apple that the updates are legitimate. They can't just verify the signatures?

ReverseCold 9y ago
Then you would be able to downgrade your OS version, they don't want that. Edit: Apparently not, you can turn it off so it doesn't require network. See the other comment.
- mikewhy 9y ago
  Except for the fact that it still lets you do exactly that.
- saagarjha 9y ago
  > Then you would be able to downgrade your OS version, they don't want that. Ignoring for the moment that you can already do this, allowing users to go back to older versions is a security hole.
pwinnski 9y ago
By default, they start out at the highest level of security, assuming an always-on network connection. It can be adjusted downward, which those of us reading HN are likely to prefer. Signature verification alone may confirm that a release is from Apple, but it doesn't confirm that the release hasn't been superseded due to security issues. (Or marketing, if you're conspiracy-minded.) The "Medium" setting allows older versions of MacOS, so although the article doesn't say, I suspect that is doing signature-verification alone, and does not require a network connection.
- lumisota 9y ago
  More about Secure Boot: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT208330 https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT208330
- monocasa 9y ago
  > Signature verification alone may confirm that a release is from Apple, but it doesn't confirm that the release hasn't been superseded due to security issues. (Or marketing, if you're conspiracy-minded.) But fuse sets will. Thus is how downgrade attacks are generally protected against in high integrity consumer electronics. That way your device continues to work when you reboot and Comcast is down again.
  - eridius 9y ago
    I'm sure the T2 doesn't verify the OS against the network at boot time, but rather when you're installing the OS update. Once it's been installed, it's trusted. The trivial proof here is if it did anything else, ignoring an OS update would brick your device, which is obviously not desired behavior.
    - willstrafach 9y ago
      > I'm sure the T2 doesn't verify the OS against the network at boot time, but rather when you're installing the OS update. Once it's been installed, it's trusted. This is correct. Network is only needed for re-install on the high security setting. When already installed, the only verification is to ensure signatures are valid, similar to how iOS devices function (You cannot re-flash/downgrade to an older OS, but if you have an older OS installed, the device will not prevent you from booting).
asendra 9y ago
It might be about blacklisting older versions, so users can only install the newest version like on iOS.

nimbius 9y ago

if youd like to cut past the fanboy fluff... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_mobile_application_processors#Apple_T2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_mobile_application_proce... The Apple T2 chip is a SoC from Apple mainly serving as a secure enclave for encrypted keys in the iMac Pro 2017. It gives users the ability to lock down the computer's boot process. It also handles system functions like the camera and audio control, and manages the solid-state drive.

djsumdog 9y ago
So it's basically SecureBoot + lets remove the SATA controller, the audio chip, the H264 chip and roll them into one chip. It feels like horizontal integration; similar to what Elon Musk does with SpaceX by integrating the pipeline and producing everything internally to save costs. The article doesn't sound very revolutionary. They're saving money, maybe a little space, by producing all those subsystems themselves. So long as they don't lock down the hardware so you can run Linux or other operating systems on it, I guess that's okay. Still, it sounds very non-upgradable. The article mentions the memory comes in two banks. Is it replaceable, or is it soldered to the board? nvme ssd cards are super tiny, super fast and super standardized. I can upgrade the ones in most laptops. I can replace a dying battery. Apple seems more geared to people who don't like to fix things or work on their own machines.
- atonse 9y ago
  It's PCIE/NVMe and removable [1]. But I don't know if it's a standard M2 slot. I doubt it. I didn't mind these proprietary connectors until I dropped tea on my laptop. I took it to the apple store to get them to retrieve my data, but they said even THEY don't have the means to read data from their proprietary SSD connector, and instead told me to go to a data recovery company. I understand they use proprietary connectors, if they empower their support techs to have means to also recover from catastrophe, it would help the customer a lot more. [1] https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iMac+Pro+Teardown/101807#s191192 https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iMac+Pro+Teardown/101807#s19...
  - 9y ago

_ph_ 9y ago

Good to read something positive about CPU technology today :). Beyond the obvious improvements for securing the computer, it is very interesting to see how the T2 chip not only operates the camera but most of all also works as a hard disk controller. So the "CPU" of the computer might be Intel still, but it is a bit of a guest in a system that is in fact controlled by the T2 chip. As the T2 seems to basically the iPhone CPU it also shows how great a hardware is in current phones now, if using that chip creates a faster flash memory controller for the biggest Intel CPUs.

microcolonel 9y ago

> On most Macs, there are discrete controllers for audio, system management and disk drives. But the T2 handles all these taks. The T2 is responsible for controlling the iMac Pro’s stereo speakers, internal microphones, and dual cooling fans, all by itself. Translation: T2 is a southbridge, but this time with a camera controller, and a TPM in addition to the normal disk, audio codec, peripheral bus, and GPIO functionality.

strictnein 9y ago
Yeah, I was definitely expecting some more interesting than this. It reads like an NVIDIA nForce2 press release from 15 years ago.
- microcolonel 9y ago
  "Your iMac, now with SoundStorm™!" Though for what it's worth, nForce2 still did require a separate codec, even if it had the controller built in.
jandrese 9y ago
It does a bit more than a southbridge, but it does take over all of the functionality that was traditionally in the southbridge. It's more like a cellphone architecture where the CPU is a slave to the black box that actually boots the device. This is exactly the sort of vendor lockdown/lockout on a PC that people have been warning us about since TPMs and signed bootloaders started appearing on cell phones.
stuff4ben 9y ago
Or T2 is like the Fat Agnus, Denise, and Paula chips all rolled into one, similar to the Amiga. Everything new is just recycled from the past.
- bch 9y ago
  Came to say the same thing (or see if someone else said it). This looks like classic multiprocessing, and looks like computing, like music and clothing, is also subject to ~20-year fashion cycles for some things.

gigatexal 9y ago

I know I trust Apple[1] and all that but I (tin-foil hats on) don't like the system on a system stuff going on. I don't like closed systems that I have no oversight into, into what they might be logging, etc. The industry will likely follow Apple here and it's not too much of an issue given how low volume that iMac Pro is going to be but this could trickle down into macbooks and that'd be sketchy. I should just go hide in my bunker and build linux from scratch on a fully GNU open laptop -- alas that's not practical. [1] more so than Google because Google uses my data and habits to sell me ads and sell that data to their customers, Apple wants to sell me gadgets and songs and movies, if that changes I'll drop Apple

danielrhodes 9y ago
Yes after a full source code review. :-P Like it or not, you have to place trust somewhere. Maybe it’s not Apple, but pretending one has full visibility over every system is just going to create cognitive dissonance.
- lisper 9y ago
  At least with Linux I can do a code review. Or hire someone I trust to do it for me. With a closed system that is not an option.
  - willstrafach 9y ago
    You can reverse engineer the firmware files though. I do this very often when new versions of iOS are released.
  - jdc0589 9y ago
    I mean yea, but this is about a processor and related microcode. It sucks, but there literally is no real mainstream opensource audit-able option for the consumer market right now.
    - lisper 9y ago
      There's this: https://www.sifive.com/products/risc-v-core-ip/ https://www.sifive.com/products/risc-v-core-ip/ Not quite ready for prime-time, but it's a big step in the right direction. At least there's hope for future.

swozey 9y ago

thinkythought 9y ago
Well, beginning of the end. It would be 3 years from whatever date they release a new version that locks it to a chip like this and drop support for old models without it. So lets say, 4-5 years. Actually, probably longer since they've been supporting old systems for as long as 8 years(2007 imac, others) with some macbook pros approaching 9-10 even. How long you think it would take for them to do this depends on whether you really think they'd just decide to cut off a ton of machines at once and reverse course on really long support windows. And long windows really seems to be a roadmap, if you look at how the ipad 2 was supported as well. I think they care more about "look at how we support our products!" than hackintoshes. What i could easily imagine though is way more features than just imessage and such being gate-kept into "only systems with our secure chip are allowed to run this"
- whywhywhywhy 9y ago
  I understand the security benefits but I can't help but just look at this as yet another piece of disposability on an already very "disposable" piece of 5K+ (starting) hardware. How many iPhones are now in landfills because you couldn't downgrade the OS to an old version that would be usable.
  - 1123581321 9y ago
    I agree with your main point about disposability. There shouldn’t be many iPhones in landfills, though. Apple recycles 100% of the materials, so as long as the old phone can be traded in or dropped off in an electronics bin, it won’t be wasted even though the owner will have been out the money by rebuying prematurely.

zapt02 9y ago

This just sound like the Intel Management Engine story waiting to happen again. A controller that handles camera, networking and is the "root of trust"? No thank you.

dkonofalski 9y ago
In what way is this similar to the IME story? Apple's history with the Secure Enclave on iOS devices leads me to believe that this will be much more secure and that a white paper will be forthcoming unlike Intel's complete opacity surrounding IME.
- zapt02 9y ago
  Do you truly believe Apples sophisticated security enclave with computer-like capabilities (and probably running a full OS) will have a manual and white-paper? This is the exact opposite of what Apple will do, they will lock it down and put it behind patents as they do best.
  - gsteinb88 9y ago
    https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf https://images.apple.com/business/docs/FaceID_Security_Guide.pdf https://images.apple.com/business/docs/FaceID_Security_Guide... Seems pretty likely there will be a whitepaper and some conference talks about this as well.
    - zapt02 9y ago
      You're linking a minimal manual which is required for corporate deployment, hardly anything Apple is being forthcoming about. I'm pretty sure you and I have different definitions of acceptable disclosure - unless Apple makes the entire chip possible to audit, I don't consider it to be acceptable.
      - dpkonofa 9y ago

qubex 9y ago

This is slightly off-topic, but developments such as these really make me look forward to when Apple will finally get around to releasing their new Mac Pro (coyly quasi-announced as not being due for release in 2017, but in development supposedly for a late 2018 or early 2019). This kind of technology might not be revolutionary per se, but makes for a very solid technological basis to build a system on. If the Mac Pro turns out to be an iMac Pro divorced from the screen and with some internal expandability in a suitably fancy-looking case, I'll be very content.

vbezhenar 9y ago
I hope that Mac Pro would be good old case with standard components without extra price. I really like macOS but all Apple's computers are just terrible for me. Mac Pro is my last hope to stay in Apple ecosystem.
- qubex 9y ago
  Considering how long it is taking them to develop it, and considering the direction they have taken with their Emoji-keyboard MacBookPros with custom chips and now the architecture of the iMac Pro, the Mac Pro is going to be anything but standard.
  - gurkendoktor 9y ago
    But they have already developed a non-standard Mac Pro in 2013, and it is widely considered a failure. I'm not sure if they'll really make the same mistake twice?
    - scarface74 9y ago
      Its not just widely considered a failure, they publicly admitted it was a failure. https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/transcript-phil-schiller-craig-federighi-and-john-ternus-on-the-state-of-apples-pro-macs/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/transcript-phil-schiller-c... Craig Federighi: I think it’s fair to say, part of why we’re talking today, is that the Mac Pro — the current vintage that we introduced — we wanted to do something bold and different. In retrospect, it didn’t well suit some of the people we were trying to reach. It’s good for some; it’s an amazingly quiet machine, it’s a beautiful machine. But it does not address the full range of customers we wanna reach with Mac Pro. But I think we designed ourselves into a bit of a thermal corner, if you will. We designed a system that we thought with the kind of GPUs that at the time we thought we needed, and that we thought we could well serve with a two GPU architecture… that that was the thermal limit we needed, or the thermal capacity we needed. But workloads didn’t materialize to fit that as broadly as we hoped.

mschuster91 9y ago

> Every bit of data stored on an iMac Pro’s SSD is encrypted on the fly by the T2, so that if a nefarious person tried to pull out the storage chips and read them later, they’d be out of luck. What. The. Fuck. How am I supposed to recover my data e.g. if the mainboard gets fried or the machine has to go to service?! With a SATA or NVMe SSD I can plug them into another computer and either keep going (for Linux and macOS, only Windows is a different beast...) or dump the data to somehere safe. With this, Apple forces me to rely on TimeMachine working - which is not a bad idea in itself, but not cool that this is not widely announced on the product page: "BACK UP THE DATA YOURSELF OR IT WILL GET LOST IF ANYTHING GETS SCREWED UP". There's already FileVault for encryption (or LUKS, VeraCrypt and Bitlocker), and in addition some SSDs (and iirc also some expensive HDDs) implement native on disk encryption via standardized SATA commands so one has encrypted storage but still portability (and for native disk encryption, no loss due to CPU-level encryption!). Another reason to not buy anything modern from Apple. If one single problem happens to your modern work machine you're straight out f...ed.

Waterluvian 9y ago
I agree that one cannot say, "backing up is good practice, if you don't do it, it's your own fault." Because the real world simply doesn't always work that way. But I like having the option of that feature. For years now my local disks are effectively just local caches. They never have more than a days worth of non-backed-up data. Apple needs to work on making it as automatic and invisible as possible for this to happen to everyone's machine even if they're tech illiterate. All I've seen so far are disparate backup stories that leave me unconfident about any of them.
- ghaff 9y ago
  >Apple needs to work on making it as automatic and invisible as possible for this to happen to everyone's machine even if they're tech illiterate. I suppose there's some degree of tech literacy required just to know that you should have a backup. But, honestly, Time Machine is probably the easiest backup system I'm aware of and I run all three major operating systems including running a cloud backup on my desktop Mac. If I were to point a finger at anyone, it would be Microsoft. (I don't really expect Linux to be drop-dead simple.) On Windows 10, it's still not really "just works" out of the box.

woliveirajr 9y ago

When all eyes are now looking to the future of branch prediction, this launch will be a bit obfuscated. Does the Intel Xeon inside the iMac Pro also vulnerable? If so, the impact of the T2 will not get attention as it should.

ovao 9y ago
Apple addresses the (known) vulnerabilities in the 10.13.2 and 10.13.3 updates.
rodorgas 9y ago
High Sierra fixed the KPTI issue without perfomance loss: https://twitter.com/aionescu/status/948609809540046849 https://twitter.com/aionescu/status/948609809540046849
- rsynnott 9y ago
  "Without performance loss" sounds optimistic, but most things that people would be doing with a Mac likely aren't syscall-intensive enough to show major effects, especially on modernish chips with PCID. Most of the more impressive performance drops from the Linux patch are with things like heavy database workloads.

saagarjha 9y ago

> if you get the 1TB model, your iMac Pro has two 512MB NAND banks Looks like you meant “GB” here.

nutbutter 9y ago

It's impossible to read the article because of the ads.

esotericsean 9y ago
uBlock Origin
lolsal 9y ago
It is easily readable with Reader View in Safari.

perfmode 9y ago

Is this basically an integrated south bridge?

ZenoArrow 9y ago
Sounds like it to me. For those that are unfamiliar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southbridge_(computing) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southbridge_(computing)
fyfy18 9y ago
It'll be interesting to see how well Linux ends up supporting these machines. Linux usually works pretty well on older Apple hardware, assuming you wait for a few patches to make everything 100% functional. This will probably mean a whole lot more code will be needed to get to that stage though.
Rebelgecko 9y ago
Maybe some bits of Southbridge and TPM mixed together

itomato 9y ago

I am surprised it has taken this long. In the Marklar days, this was something we speculated about as a Clone-defeat mechanism. Essentially a hackintosh blocker. I look forward to following the discoveries made in this subsystem.

bsharitt 9y ago

I find it interesting that Apple is back to high levels of customization in its PCs. If I'm remembering correctly, one of the big motivators to move to x86 was to be able to use more commodity stuff through out the system, rather than the all the custom work required to design PowerPC system. I recall initial speculation that Apple's x86 machines would be pretty much fully custom chipsets and designs that just happened to have an x86 CPU, but then when the release systems came out, they used Intel chipsets and were pretty ordinary from a PC hardware standpoint.

fnbr 9y ago
Based on my understanding of the issue, the main difference between now and then is scale. Pre-iPhone, Apple didn't have the scale to make their own chips economically; now, with the massive success of the iPhone, they're able to do this. Their major value proposition is that they're able to build software-differentiated hardware, so building their own chips is extremely valuable to them.
zitterbewegung 9y ago
That Stopped during the rise of the iPhone and iPad when they made the A4 chip. Once they figured out how to vertically integrate that during Jobs. After the death of Jobs and the appointment of Tim Cook we just see that vision taken to the end of which we have now.
com2kid 9y ago
Custom motherboards is an expertise Apple has built up over the years with the iPhone (of course they also do custom CPUs as well there!). A huge portion of bugs and power issues on a modern PC stem from poor hardware drivers. Cutting out the middle man and just writing all the drivers themselves may very well be a net win for Apple if they want to keep a reputation for working hardware. Then again they have gotten have their lighting out for display working quite right.
- itomato 9y ago
  Apple have been making logic boards since the beginning. The inclusion of custom silicon isn't new either. Nor are in-house drivers for commodity equipmemt, as the move from NeXT Computer, Inc. to NeXT Software required it. As you point out, by ceasing to rely on third party IP in that custom silicon they reduce the complexity further still. 100% in-house widgets have been on the whiteboard at Apple for a long time.

b1gtuna 9y ago

I love the level of integration with this chip. How big is their IC design team?

newscracker 9y ago
Not very big, is my understanding. The team mainly came from the PA Semi acquisition several years ago, and there was some recent news about Google hiring (“poaching”) a key senior person from this team.

znpy 9y ago

Intel ME? Hold my beer. -- Apple.

danellis 9y ago

> Before the iMac Pro was released, there was a lot of speculation that it was part of a trend toward creating a “hybrid Mac” that is driven by both an Intel processor and an Apple-designed ARM chip like those found in other Apple devices. The iMac Pro is definitely a hybrid of a sort, but probably not the one people were expecting. Not the thing people were expecting, but still, does anyone know if the T2 is based around one of Apple's ARM cores?

wmf 9y ago
The T2 is rumored to be a derivative of the A10.

kilon 9y ago

"The iMac Pro isn’t running iOS apps" I always find this kind of remarks funny because iOS is essentially a specialised strip down version of MacOS. So basically any accusation of MacOS copying iOS , however exaggerated, is an accusation that MacOS is copying itself.

Chaebixi 9y ago

What is old is new again: https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Five_Different_Macs.txt https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Five_Different_M...

jhiska 9y ago

So... I read the article and I still don't know what, exactly, is the T2 chip or what, exactly, makes it different from other ARM / Intel hybrids, other than several different ways of expressing "it's incredibly, totally great" and "Intel is untrustworthy, so let's trust Apple instead" and "this changes everything all over again". (It doesn't, unless you arbitrarily consider small, incremental changes exclusive to Apple products as the opposite of small and incremental just because of the size of Apple.)

jacobolus 9y ago
It’s a chip which replaces the controllers (previously several of them, from different vendors, that Apple didn’t have control over) for disk and network I/O, speakers, microphone, camera, cooling system, etc. with a single Apple-designed chip. This lets Apple add features to their hardware unsupported by other controllers, move some features from the CPU to this new chip which can reduce attack surface area and free up CPU cycles for something else, save space on the motherboard, and maybe save money.

j3097736 9y ago

>The T2 is responsible for controlling the iMac Pro’s stereo speakers, internal microphones, and dual cooling fans, all by itself. So it's just a fancy Super I/O chip

amckinlay 9y ago

I'm glad they allow you to completely disable the "secure boot" functionality so that other OSes like Linux can be installed. Glad Apple didn't pull a Microsoft here. I would be delighted, however, if the secure boot functionality was programmable with custom certificates!

bcjordan 9y ago

Slightly OT, Apple really needs to release a Macbook Pro or two with beefy video cards -- it's becoming nearly untenable to develop games or for AR/VR with their latest hardware. Their Intel-integrated cards are not up to the task.

AlphaSite 9y ago
Isn’t this why they added support for externals GPUs?

sspiff 9y ago

> For security reasons, the T2 is the iMac Pro hardware’s “root of trust,” and it validates the entire boot process when the power comes on. The T2 starts up, checks things out, loads its bootloader, verifies that it’s legitimate and cryptographically signed by Apple, and then moves on to the next part of the boot process. How is this more secure from a locked down system using "standard" UEFI secure boot powered by any other TPM implementation? I understand that this is not an in-depth technical analysis, mainly catering to the Mac-loving audience of the site and getting them to feel better about their platform of choice. But I'd be interested to hear why I would trust this Apple T2 chip more than a workstation motherboard with a TPM on it, and secure boot on and loaded only with the keys of myself (in case I were to build my own kernel/bootloader and sign it) or a vendor I trust. I could be missing something, but the process outlined in the article sounds exactly like secure boot.

faragon 9y ago

Where is the disk key? Is it stored in the main board, or in the flash disk itself? E.g. if you have to replace the motherboard, do you lose the data, or because of being in the flash disk it is OK? BTW, if being in the flash disk, how secure it is the key handling?

ksec 9y ago

I am wondering on the cost benefits this has with Apple. While it is insignificant with the iMac Pro, it will be important once it is filter down to entry level. Apple now basically have its own IP in everything. Instead of sourcing and paying IP or chips, they can now mix and match their own and build with TSMC. All with the help of iPhone's R&D. I am pretty sure the next one on the list is WiFi and Bluetooth. This a potential saving of up to $50 in BOM cost. If you tell most PC vendor a extra $50 profits per machine they would have their eyes wide open. This roughly translate to a $100 cheaper Retail pricing, but given it is Apple they will likely use this saving to put YET another silly features on the Macbook to sell it at the same price.